click to show more information

click to hide/show information About this Show

Capitol Hill Hearings

News/Business.

NETWORK

DURATION
01:00:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 91 (627 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
704

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Afghanistan 18, U.s. 9, United States 5, Us 5, Tim Geithner 3, Carol 3, Washington 3, Jack Lew 3, Sigar 2, Clinton 2, Iraq 2, Etc. 2, Omb 2, America 2, John Engler 1, Stewart Bowen 1, Stuart 1, F. Kennan 1, Ray Lahood 1, Perdue University Prof. Randy Roberts 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  CSPAN    Capitol Hill Hearings    News/Business.  

    January 11, 2013
    6:00 - 6:59am EST  

6:00am
in the same facilities. they take the mission because they believe in it. that is the difference with sigar. that's why i think we can make a difference. i also we're going to be fair and relevant and do it quickly. as the security is -- situation changes there, if we make a difference, we have to do it soon. this means we will employ traditional ig that this but we will not stop there. we will explore new innovative ways of conducting oversight. some examples of those are that we have the most aggressive suspension and debarrment in the inspector general community. we have cited 106 individuals for disbarment, far more than any other government agency in
6:01am
afghanistan and this has included 43 individuals and companies identified as having actively supported insurgent groups. unfortunately, not every agency in the u.s. government has the same fire in the belly. when we refer companies or individuals for suspension and debarment, those individuals are not acted on expeditiously as we want. we have proposed granting sigar or the theater commanders that can allowance to get rid of bad actors as soon as we find them. we are also working more closely than any other law enforcement agency with the afghan police and prosecutors to get afghan's charged, tried, and convicted in afghan accords for bribery and corruption. remember, this may sound odd to you, why are we using u.s. court
6:02am
stepped in afghanistan, unlike in iraq where u.s. contractors were predominant, the u.s. government promoted an afghan- first initiative which emphasized prioritizing contracts with afghan-owned and operated companies. that is why in order to fulfil our mission of combating fraud, in many cases, we need to work through the f. kennan law enforcement and legal system when we uncover criminal activity. that is a challenge but it has paid dividends. just recently, a prominent individual in one province was convicted and sentenced to two years in jail after sigar agents went undercover and take him offering bribes. another thing i told my staff on the first day of work was that we have to be relevant by
6:03am
approaching our work like i did what i was an attorney having clients. we have to view the people use our report and our investigations as their clients. if what we produce is not used by the commander in the field for the state department for the aid administrator, we have failed. they are our clients. if our audits are not relevant to congress, the congressional committees, who are our clients, for them making decisions on appropriations are authorizations, we failed. if my criminal investigators produce investigations that the department of justice does not take to trial, then we failed. i emphasize to them that you have clients and you have to produce reports and you have to produce investigations that are
6:04am
useful to them. the first thing i did with glenmont, went to afghanistan and talk to the generals and went around town and talk to the state department and defense department and spent time up in the hills talking to the various congressional committees and their staffs, one of them is here today -- about what they needed and what we were doing or not doing to support them in their missions. i hope and i think it has succeeded. the other thing i did -- to some it may have appeared awed -- also reached out to a number of clients. it is the academic and think tank community. we don't have all the answers.
6:05am
that is one reason why i came here to talk. we, the experts think, we are doing right thing in our wallets, investigations, and our targets in afghanistan. i hope that works and of that is one reason why i am here today is to talk to many of you. we s sigar need to get our job right. -- we at sigar need to get our job right by ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely. and are protected from waste, fraud, and abuse. if we don't get it right, then those lives and that treasurer we have spent our last 11 years will have been wasted. it will have been spent in vain. that is something that i can give you a commitment today -- i
6:06am
and my staff will do everything in our power to ensure that does not happen. thank you very much. i look forward to answering any questions. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> somebody have a question? if not i will leave. oh, ok. >> in the past decade, we have seen all sorts of accounts, both the strengths and weaknesses of the government relied on the private sector for security and logistics and development. going forward, nobody envisions that government will not be relying on them for future contingency operations. what are your possible
6:07am
recommendations on insuring the best effective accountability and oversight in the future? a couple of years ago, stewart bowen made a recommendation for a cross-agency that would do that. i don't know if that is a good idea or bad. >> i think that is a good question. -- if iknow if i agree would agree with stuart's suggestion of setting up a permanent entity. i think he made that suggestion before i was with sigar. i am a strong believer in specialization. we are kind of a unique bunch, specialized ig.
6:08am
congress in its infinite wisdom actually gave us tremendous authorities, tremendous powers. if you look at legislation for the regular ig compared with stored bowen's legislation and mine, you tripped over the term 'independent.' i think it is mentioned 15 times in the first paragraph. we are so independent, maybe we are scary, we can get the job done. we are given greater authority for hiring and firing. we come into existence and use obligated funds and i think that is a good approach. you come in, you grow and when the problem is finished, you go away. i disagree with his proposal. i think you'll hear from some
6:09am
speakers later -- other created.s worwere other approaches could be effective i just personally, may be having been in a special ig, i am happy with the powers i got. if you get the money and leadership fast enough, the special ig approach is a good way to handle contingency operations. is, sir? >> thank you very much. i may founder and adviser to transparency international. stuart bowen wrote a good book with many good reports.
6:10am
as u.s. a id and the department of defense really learn from the lessons of iraq when it comes to afghanistan today? talking to my friends at integrity watch in afghanistan, one gets the impression that things are getting worse, not better. your opening sounded like that but i would like your opinion stepping back a bit and talking about those two agencies which have a major role. >> i have only been there for six months. i have spent my whole life doing oversight and accountability by focused on afghanistan for six months for i'm not as good an expert as some people in this room. i am impressed by dod. i think their response to some of the problems -- i don't know if they were identified in iraq
6:11am
-- i am particularly impressed with tax -- a task force 2010. general lon go is fantastic and that was said to deal with the contract in problems. many people i have dealt with -- a number of task forces were setup and i think they are good and we have worked closely with all of them. i am not certain aid got the message. it is too early to tell. you may all think it will end in 2014 but there is every construction budget coming along after words. there will be a lot of time to tell. i hope aid has we are looking at a because we want to make certain they planned for the new contingency and that is what the security situation is.
6:12am
i am not an expert on this but i have been extremely impressed with the commanders on the ground and how they take security -- not security, but contracts and abuses and theft and problems like that so seriously. i will be meeting him shortly -- general allan has been one of my best friends and their agencies best friends in afghanistan. on supporting our mission and allowing us to be embedded with troops. you accomplish so much when that happens. i don't want to dwell on the question but let me give you an example -- you get down to the local commanders -- we have seen differences depending on which reserve unit shows up. the commander from a reserve
6:13am
unit shows up at one of these operating basis and takes contract abuse, theft seriously -- the amount of that's just drop off. if he does not, if he does not talk to my people, if he does not really care, he just punches his ticket, problems galore. it really matters that they take this seriously. i hope that answers your question. yes, sir? >> i was found director aid. i think we are on the same side. i wonder whether the abuses of contract and, particularly in light of aid's own findings that there are only three capable government entities they have identified in afghanistan, means oft holbrook's policy
6:14am
contract and was flawed. in vietnam, 2/3 of the development initiatives there were found after the war not to have specified out comes and development impacts in the planning that led, in part, to such a disappointment on the hill at the foreign aid act was voted down in the senate in 1974. do you think findings like the inspector general has found are going to be so serious on the hill that it in dangers the entire vote? >> maybe we should wait until the other panel gets up. that is more direct to the hilt. i don't know what will happen with the help's response. response?l's >> [inaudible] >> there is pros and cons with
6:15am
the approach toward local contractors. i could understand where they're coming from. i come from the midwest and i am not too sophisticated. we've got to be able to ask the question -- does our contract or decision on what ever we are doing their -- does it mean our national security and -- does it meet our national security objective? do the afghans wanted? the third question is -- do they actually need it? the fourth question you want to ask is -- can they sustain it? whether it is designing a program of contract and afghan- first or building a base for coming up with it program training judges, i think you have to ask those questions.
6:16am
those are simple questions. it is not rocket science. i used to teach in american university. used to teach courses to cops and prosecutors. this is not rocket science. i don't know if aid should be rocket science. i have been impressed that some people have said we really need a designed program knowing where we are working. if we know we're working in the most corrupt country and the world, we design a program that protects the funding. i was very impressed with that. i have not seen a program with that bill 10. people tell me they are thinking about it. some the -- someone told me the norwegians do that but i have not run into many norwegians. yes, sir? you are norwegian? >> no.
6:17am
one thing i came away with is that the afghans are very good at running their own businesses but what we do as we create an incentive or by running a business is about profits. i have partnered with an afghan and several afghans' over there and we are trying to build infrastructure where afghans have a stake in the infrastructure itself rather than just jobs today and maybe the americans come back and fix it later. i was wondering what your perspectives are on where you see this kind of model? have you seen this kind of model employed by comes to building infrastructure in afghanistan? >> the simple answer is no. we just did a report -- a number
6:18am
of audits -- on the afghan electrical grid. we just released a couple of weeks ago -- this is the problem -- we thought was a great idea for the afghans to install meters so they could bill for electricity use. we found that nobody ever talked to the afghans. it was 10 or $15 million, very small and there are meters in in a warehouse because no one talked to the afghans. they have no technical capability to install the meters. we went out and bought more meters. that is unfortunate. we did an audit, one of the first of its when i came in, on the afghan infrastructure program.
6:19am
they were big ticket projects that had to do with dams and bridges. it was a situation where we did not talk to the afghans, we did not coordinate with them, we did not coordinate with the asian development bank. we poured millions of dollars into a program. notnot saying there are programs like that. i have not run across one yet. i would love to, like the norwegian, i would love to meet them and see how they design programs that include prevention but that's what i am told. it is the learning experience for me. yes, sir? >> i am a grad student at american university. i know you are investigating criminal activity in
6:20am
afghanistan. how could you crackdown on someone like that? it is amazing it is going on in the united states as far as finding previous afghan officials and one is suspected of corruption and embezzlement. is there anything going on in terms -- inside the united states in terms of cracking down on former afghan officials? >> i cannot discuss any long ago -- ongoing investigations. we deal with facts. we deal of evidence. where that takes us, we follow. we are unique or in afghanistan but we also have indictments and investigations, criminal investigations in the united states.
6:21am
i believe we just arrested and convicted a senior enlisted man for taking bribes. as a matter of fact, we have a unique approach. i had my own prosecutors on my staff. i pay their salaries and they are called sig-pros. we have special investigations going on. i don't want to comment on any -- there are speculations and allegations out there and that is good for a newspaper article. i have to deal with facts. i have to deal with evidence. that is difficult to get because a lot of my evidence is in afghanistan and the afghan citizens or third-party nationals who may have worked
6:22am
and are gone -- it is not easy. if it was easy, anybody could do it. it is something we're doing in the united states. yes, sir? >> i am from national defense university. it is one thing -- first of all, thank you, for confirming my worst expectations. >> is my speech that bad? >> auditing the building of buildings and infrastructure is one thing but a lot of u.s. taxpayer money is being spent on more traditional development programs that do a partner capacity building an institution building and democratization and education. do you have a strategy how to audit the effectiveness of those investments? >> we do. we produced, under my watch, the
6:23am
first joint strategy for doing audits and investigations in that area in afghanistan with the aidag, dodag, and the state ag. it lays out a strategy where we're focusing on the most important programs by dollar amounts and impact on our mission. it is a 50-page strategy but we do have a strategy. it was not until i showed up that we had a joint strategy. we have been spending money there for eight years-10 years before but no one had come up with a joint strategy as to how we tout -- target for audits. yes, sir, in the way back? >> initially in terms of reconstruction in afghanistan,
6:24am
you outlined a bleak situation. what do you think it takes to improve that situation and what role does your office play in that? of all the problems to outline, what specific agencies do you hold responsible for those issues? >> i don't hold any particular agency responsible. security is an issue. corruption is an issue. i think every agency in the u.s. government has to do more, has to do a better job, has to think about the questions i posed. i'm not pointing to any particular agency. which is the most important? >> initially you outlined a bleak situation. what will it take to improve them what role will your office
6:25am
play in that? >> our role, as an inspector general for afghanistan, i don't to policy. i don't design and make the policy. i see how well it is carried out. i think the policy makers need to read the reports, talk to the agencies, and make a determination how they are proceeding in the right direction. i think that is our role, our continued role will be to find people who are stealing and try to prosecute them either in afghanistan courts or in u.s. courts. we will identify problems with programs and give advice to congress and other clients as to
6:26am
how to improve those. that will be our role. does the policy makers that have to take the information that i produceand other ig's and synthesize that into how that will impact on our programs. i am getting the hook. >> i think we are going to move on to the panel. >> fantastic. >> there is so much interest in this, we could go on for two more hours. we brought some of high interest, john, thank you so much for coming. >> thank you so much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] ♪ ♪ movielywood's most famous
6:27am
stars leave the film catheter -- capital to sell war bonds they're all part of a contingent of some 50 screen celebrities giving their time and talents to aid to the national war effort. >> this is how popular culture presented the war. how was the war presented in movies from the 1940's dax how was it prevented -- presented? how was it presented in athletic events from the 1930's and 1940's? how was it presented in tin pan alley, in music, from the 1940's? >> of this weekend, popular culture and world war ii with perdue university prof. randy roberts. that is saturday night at 8:00 and 10:00 eastern on cspan 3.
6:28am
>> thursday, vice president joe biden held a meeting with sportsmen and well but interest groups as part of the white house's gun violence task force. he later met with national rifle association leaders and representatives from the entertainment industry. he said he will deliver recommendations to the president by tuesday. from the eisenhower executive office building, this is 15 minutes >> let me thank you all for being here. you represent the bulk of sportsmen in this country, and you all know this is a complicated issue. there is no singular solution to how we deal with the kind of things that happen in new town or colorado or the general gun violence in america today. the president and i and the cabinet, we understand it is a complicated issue. that is why when the president asked me to do this in
6:29am
conjunction with my colleagues in cabinet, what we did was, we put together a pretty extensive list of what we consider to be the stakeholders wanting to deal with the issue of gun violence in america. the first groups mean that west where -- would not surprise you. national law enforcement organizations. also, we got a sense of -- to give you a sense of what we have done so far, we met with the american medical community, a group of about 15 leading medical doctors representing organizations across the country. we have met with at risk youth and children's advocacy groups from the alliance to promise america to the boys and girls
6:30am
club, etc. we believe this is cultural as much as it is weapons themselves. we met with domestic violence prevention communities. we met with justice organizations like the aba. we met with the national legal aid and defenders associations, prosecutors. we met with national service organizations. kawano as, rotary international. we have met with youth groups. we have met with gun safety advocates. yesterday that meeting took place here. also come up a dozen other organizations -- also, a dozen other organizations. that are concerned about gun safety. and we met with educators and parents from the school boards
6:31am
to the state school offices and associations. again, the governors of those folks. and maybe one of the most important things we have been focusing on is the mental health community. the american academy for childhood and adolescence psychiatry, the national counselor community of behavioral health centers. there is a perspective among health providers that mental illness is a major component. and yesterday, we finished up on in this room with about 17 members of the faith community, which in all the years i have been doing this, the first time there has been overwhelming consensus on the evangelical groups nationwide. particularly those from the rural areas.
6:32am
the national catholic conference of bishops. the muslim community. because this does up a significant moral dimension to it. how do we make the american community safer? how do we go about it? and tonight, we meet with too. later, i need with industry representatives, as well as the nra, and the executive director of defense, the head by a 3 -- the small arms advisory council, etc.. the point i am trying to make to you is, we realize this requires all the stakeholders to give us the best ideas as to how we deal with what i said at the outset is a complicated problem. there is no single answer. to go back, i know a lot of you have been dealing with this issue since my times as
6:33am
chairman of the judicial committee of the way back and in the 1970's. if you look at the tragic events that have attracted some much attention, it is hard to pinpoint what you could have done to be sure it did not happen. but there are also things we know. we know there are certain actions we take back that have diminished the extent of gun violence that otherwise would be occurring in the united states. and so, the kinds of things -- there is an emerging set of recommendations. not coming from me, but coming from groups we have met with. and i am going to focus on the ones that relate primarily to gun and ownership and the type of weapons that can beyond. one is, there is a surprising -- so far -- surprising
6:34am
recurrence of suggestions that we have universal background checks. not just closed with the gun show people -- local, but total universal background checks. there has been a lot of discussion from the groups we have met with so far. i think the chairman has been in any meetings with me. -- has been in almost all the meetings with me. how do we share the information? how to get information -- for example convicted felons in the state -- how do they get in the nics? that is the thing that the gun dealer goes to to check your background, whether you are a felon. it does not do a lot of good if some states have a backlog of 60,000 felons they never registered. so, we've got to talk about --
6:35am
there's a lot of talk about how we entice or what is the impediment keeping states from relaying this information. there's also a good deal of talk about gun safety. and what responsibility goes along with gun ownership. that is something i am really anxious to talk to all of you about. there's also -- surprising -- my former colleagues in the senate who have previously been opposed to any restrictions on gun ownership or what type of weapons can be purchased, as ever, there is i have never heard quite as much talk about limiting high-capacity magazines as i have heard spontaneously from every group we have met with so far. and the last area, which is an
6:36am
area that has come up, is the question of the ability of any federal agency to do research on the issue of gun violence. for example, we are meeting before the week is out with the video gaming industry. to use pat moynihan's expression, when we first started talking about this, back in the 1980's, he said we started by defining deviancy down. he said we had this fascination with violent thoughts back in the 1930's, and he stood on the senate floor and he held up the new york times. on page 54 -- in the very back of the paper -- and entire family including grandmother,
6:37am
mother, father, children were basically assassinated in their apartment. they think it may have been about a drug deal. he said "we can define it deviancy down." one of the things that prohibit -- the early part of this century, 2004, the centers for disease control gathering information about the kinds of injuries and what sort of energies and what are the source of the injuries? it kind of reminded me in a meeting yesterday. i was around in the 1970's. the only guy who can remember this -- i hope i am not insulting him -- is ray lahood. he remembers the auto industry.
6:38am
he remembers the whole question of traffic safety and highway safety. there was a big fight when i first got in the senate that began in the late 1960 fell through early 1970's. the automobile industry did not want to allow the department of transportation to acquire statistics on the type of accidents that occur. they were not able to literally acquire the information. because the concern was it would lead to calls for some rational regulations for the guardrails for automobiles. i remember when we finally broke through and the department of transportation started keeping misinformation, they found out -- if my memory is correct -- the vast majority of drivers -- the steering wheel damage to their solar plexus,
6:39am
penetrated their upper body cavity, damaged their heart. the reason the industry did not want us knowing that, we had to do something about the steering wheel. make sure that the steering wheel collapses. all of a sudden, they said -- you cannot make an automobile that does not have a steering wheel column with the following attributes. you have to make an automobile that can absorb excess amount of shock. all of a sudden we found out passengers were being killed going through the windshield. skull fractures, hitting their head on the cross bar. all of a sudden, it made sense. why not make airbags. -- why not make air bags?
6:40am
we are saving lives. as you know, the real restrictions now on the ability of any agency in government to gather information about what kind of weapons are used most to kill people. how many weapons are used in traffic accidents? our weapons used in gang warfare in our major cities? are they legally purchased or purchased through a straw man? we do not have that information. and the irony is, we are prohibited under laws and appropriations bills. i want to talk to you all a little bit, as an owner of shotguns, as a guy who is no great hunter -- mostly caskey
6:41am
shooting -- i do not quite -- mostly skeet shooting -- i cannot quite know how we determine what is happening. there are a whole lot of things i want to talk to you about. i did want to talk to you about what we have done so far. we will meet again. this afternoon we had meetings. tomorrow afternoon we have meetings. i am trying to have a telephone conferences with the manufacturer's. there has got to be some common ground here. to not solve every problem, but to acknowledge the probability that we have seen these mass shootings occur and to diminish the probability that these shootings will occur as schools and to diminish the probability that these weapons will be used, firearms will be used dealing with the average
6:42am
behavior that occurs in our society. that is what this is all about. there is no conclusion i have reached with my colleagues. i have put together a series of recommendations. there is a very tight window to do this. i committed to him i would have these recommendations to him by tuesday. it does not mean it is the end of the discussion. but the public wants us to act. i will conclude by saying, in all my years involved with these issues, there is nothing that has pricked the conscience of the american people, nothing that has gone to the heart and mattered more than the visions that these people have of these
6:43am
little six-year-old kids riddled -- not shot -- riddled, riddled with bullet holes in their classroom. and the public demands we speak to it. and i am sure we cannot guarantee this will never happen again, but as the president said, if what we do and what we say only saves one life, that makes the difference. i do not believe we are imposing on the rights that the second amendment guarantees. now with your permission, let's get down to business. i think the press for being here. >> [indiscernible] alle're going to talk about these things. >> thursday, president obama
6:44am
announced white house chief of staff jack lew to head the treasury department. he praised outgoing secretary tim geithner. if confirmed, he would take over the treasury department's before the white house and congress debates the debt ceiling. this is 15 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied by some of tim geithner and sap jack lew. >> men, everybody, please have a seat. a little more than four years ago, i stood with mr. tim geithner and denounced him as my first to my cabinet. we were barely two months into the financial crisis, the stock market have quivered, the
6:45am
housing market had cratered as well, a bank after bank was on the verge of collapse, and worst of all, more than 800,000 americans would lose their jobs in just a bad month. and the bottom was not yet in sight. i cannot blame tim when he told me he was not the right guy for the job. [laughter] extensivet tim's experience with economic policy made him qualified and i knew he could hit the ground running. as chairman of the new york federal reserve, he had just spent several sleepless and chaotic weeks immersed in the complexities of the crisis and had been working closely with his republican predecessor at treasury to save the financial system. then with the wreckage of our economy still smoldering and unstable, i asked him to help put back together. thanks in large part to his steady hand, our economy has been growing again for the past
6:46am
three years. our businesses have created nearly 6 million new jobs, the money that we spend to save the financial system has largely been paid back, we put in place of rules to prevent that kind of financial meltdown from ever happening again, the auto industry was saved, we made sure taxpayers are not on hook if the biggest firms fail again. we have taken steps to help underwater homeowners come up for air and opened new markets to sell american goods overseas and we have begun to reduce our deficit and reform to a tax code that, at the time we both came in, was too skewed in favor of the wealthy at the expense of middle class americans. when the history books are written, tim geithner will go down as one of our finest
6:47am
secretaries of the treasury. [applause] [applause] >> don't embarrass him. [laughter] on a personal note, tim has been a wonderful friend and a dependable adviser to route these last four years. there is an unofficial saying at treasury -- no peacocks, and the jerks, no wiener's. would be a good saying for all of washington. few embody that i do better than tim geithner.
6:48am
that is why when he was thinking about leaving a couple of years ago -- [laughter] i had to personally get on my knees with carol to help convince him to stay on a little bit longer. i could not be more grateful to carol and the entire geithner family for allowing him to make the sacrifices that so many of our capt. members as to their families in serving the country. while a lot of work remains, especially to rebuild a strong middle-class and offer working folks new pathways to get into the middle class, our economy is better positioned for tomorrow the most -- that most of the other countries hit by the financial crisis. the tough. tim made and carried out deserve a lot of credit for that. i understand that tim is ready for a break. obviously, we are sad to see him go but i cannot think of a
6:49am
better person to continue tim's or ed treasury than jack lew. this is bittersweet not only because tim is leaving but because jack has been my chief of staff for the past year. was my budget director before that. i trust his judgment, i value his friendship, i know very few people with greater integrity than the man to my left. i don't want to see him go because it is working out really well for me to have him in the white house. my loss will be the nation's game. jack has the distinction of having worked and succeeded in some of the toughest jobs in washington and the private sector. as a congressional staffer in the 1980's, he helped negotiate the deal between president reagan and tip o'neill to save social security. under president clinton, he presided over three budget surpluses in a row. for all the talk out their
6:50am
about deficit-reduction, making sure our books are balanced, this is the guy who did it. , three times. he helped oversee what our nation's finest universities and one of our largest investment firms. in my administration, he has managed operations for the state department and the budget for the entire executive branch. over the past year, i have sought his advice on virtually every decision i have made on economic and foreign policy. one reason jack has been so effective in this town is because he is a low-key guy who prefers to surround himself with experts rather than television cameras. he has built a reputation as a master policy who can work with members of both parties and forge compromises. maybe most importantly, as the son of a polish immigrant, a man of deep and devout faith, he knows that every number on a page, every dollar we budget,
6:51am
every decision we make, has to be an expression of who we wish to be as a nation, our values. the values that say everybody gets a fair shot at opportunity and says we expect all of us to fulfil our individual obligations as citizens in return. jack has my complete trust. i am not -- i know i am not alone. in the words of a former senator, having lew on your team is the equivalent of having a coach on your team that will do well and i cannot agree more. i hope the senate will confirm him as quickly as possible. i want to personally thank both of these men and their families, especially caro land ruth for their extraordinary service to our country and with that, i would like to invite them to stay a few words. -- to say few words -- >> mr. president, it has been a privilege to serve you.
6:52am
am honored and grateful that you asked me to do this, really. i am very proud of what my colleague at treasury and your economic team accomplish this first four years. when you step into this building as president, you're confronted with a world in crisis, the worst crisis in generations. you made the necessary, the hard, the politically perilous choices that saved the american people, save american industries, save the global economy from a failing financial system. your successful response to the crisis did not solve all the nations challenges. it could not have done so. the actions you took, along with those of a forceful and creates a federal reserve, have made the country stronger and have put as a much better position to face the many challenges still ahead of us and they are many. i have the greatest respect for
6:53am
jack lew. he is a man of exceptional judgment, calm under pressure with an extraordinary record of accomplishment and experience over decades spent at the center of economic policy. he is committed to defending the elderly and the poor and understands what it takes to create the conditions for stronger economic growth and broader economic opportunity, and he understands that to govern responsibly, to govern with the recognition that we have limited fiscal resources. like jack, i have spent my professional life in this world of public policy and public service. as all of you know, our families carried a large share of the burdens we assume in public life. i feel incredibly fortunate that my wife, carol, and my family have been willing to allow me to do this. i thank them for their support and their patience and i
6:54am
understand, their occasional inpatients. [laughter] i want to express my appreciation and admiration for the men and women of the treasury department who came to serve you these years of crisis and the civil servants of the treasury with whom i first started working in 1988. they are exceptionally talented and honorable public servants. i am proud of what they have help you accomplish and i am confident that my successor will find them to be an extraordinary asset that they are to the nation. i also hope that americans will look at the challenges we face today and decide that in spite of the device of state of our political system today, serving your country is compelling and rewarding work. that was my experience and i am grateful and will always be
6:55am
grateful to you for having given me the opportunity to serve you as the 75th secretary of the treasury. [applause] [applause] >> mr. president, it has been my honor to serve as your chief of staff and before that, at omb and the state department. it is a privilege to come to work every day as part of a team dedicated to building a sound economy and a safer world. tim, have been a friend at a college four years -- and a colleague for years, decades. i thought i knew pretty well but it was only yesterday that i
6:56am
discovered we both share a common challenge for penmanship. [laughter] i joined the president and everyone here in wishing you and carol and your whole family well. as a kid growing up in queens, i had dreams of making a difference in the world for these trends were nurtured in a home or the gifts of american freedom and opportunity were cherished and never taken for granted and the responsibility to engage and issues of public concern report of daily life. will always be grateful to my parents for grounding the in the values that have remained central to my professional life and personal life. i grew up in the office of speaker tip o'neill was conscious was always clear and demanded an unvarnished by some have to meet the agreed to meet the desired destination. he knew little about your age iran but just what you did the hard work to inform the decisions of the day and he took a big chance given responsibility to a very young man and for that i will always be thankful.
6:57am
serving at omb first under president clinton and more recently in this administration, i work with one of the finest teams in government to execute a responsible fiscal policy while advancing economic growth. i am delighted to see so many of my friends from omb here today. at the state department, worked closely with our great secretary of state hillary clinton to advance our nation's national security agenda including our international economic policies. as chief of staff, i have had the pleasure of working with a tremendously talented white house team which manages policy, politics, communications, and complex operations every day with grace, skill, and loyalty. if confirmed, i look forward to joining the treasury department whose people are legendary for their skill and knowledge. i have collaborated with them closely over many years and come to respect them. thank you to ruth and the kids for and less tolerance with the demands of the schedule that tests all family patients.
6:58am
thank you, mr. president, for your trust, your confidence, and friendship. serving in your administration has allowed me to live out those values my parents instill in me and i look forward to continuing that challenges ahead. [applause] >> these are two outstanding public servants. the only point i want to make and leave you with is the fact that i had never noticed jacks signature. [laughter] when this was highlighted yesterday in the press, i considered rescinding.
6:59am
my offer to appoint him. [laughter] jack assures me that he will work to make at least one letter legible [laughter] in order not to debase our currency. should he be confirmed as secretary of the treasury. [laughter] thank you very much, everybody. [applause] host [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> coming up live today on c- span, "washington journal." then a discussion on guantanamo bay. this afternoon at 5:30 p.m., afghan president hamid karzai speaks at georgetown university and u.s. relations with afghanistan. in 45 minutes, former michigan governor john engler talks about the fiscal cliff deal and future budget battles in the congress. at 8:30 eastern,